Clause 33.—(PERIODICAL REVISION OF MAPS AND STATEMENTS.) (Hansard, 19 July 1949)

§ Mr. Silkin

I beg to move, in page 25, line 16, at the end, to insert: Provided that if within such time (not being less than twenty-eight days) as may be specified in the notice any representation is made to the authority that as respects the whole or part of their area a revised map and statement prepared as aforesaid would differ from the definitive or last revised map and statement,—

(a) the authority, after considering the representation and affording to the person by whom it was made an opportunity of being heard by a person appointed by the authority for the purpose, shall determine whether the representation is well founded and shall serve notice of their determination on the person by whom the representation was made;
(b) any person aggrieved by a determination of the authority under the last foregoing paragraph may, at any time within fourteen days after the service upon him of the notice of determination, serve notice of appeal against that determination on the Minister and on the authority;
(c) where notice of appeal is duly served under the last foregoing paragraph the Minister, after giving to the appellant and to the authority an opportunity of being heard by a person appointed by him for the purpose, shall either dismiss the appeal or direct that effect shall be given to the representation;
(d) if the authority determine that a representation is well founded or the Minister directs that a representation shall have effect, the authority shall be required to prepare a revised map and statement in consequence of the review, so however that where the representation relates to part only of their area they shall not be required so to prepare a revised map and statement for any other part of their area."

Clause 33 provides for a periodic review of the footpath map, and it contemplates the possibility that a county council may take the view that there has been no change of circumstance since the last map was prepared. That view may be disputed, and this Amendment provides machinery, which did not originally exist, for disputing such a decision. The machinery is similar to that which is provided for a person who 1181 alleges, when the survey is being made, that a footpath which was not included ought to have been included.